Sen DeMint: Term Limits for All

[Hey Paula]

DeMint Introduces “Term Limits for All” Constitutional Amendment
Amendment would limit every House member to 3 terms, every Senator to 2 terms

November 10, 2009 - WASHINGTON, D.C. - Today, U.S. Senator Jim DeMint (R-South Carolina) introduced an amendment to the United States Constitution that would apply term limits to all members of Congress, limiting U.S. Representatives to three terms and U.S. Senators to two terms in office. The amendment is cosponsored by U.S. Senators Tom Coburn (R-Oklahoma), Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas), and Sam Brownback (R-Kansas). As an amendment to the Constitution, it would require a two-thirds majority vote approval in the House and Senate and must be ratified by three-fourths of the states.

"Americans know real change in Washington will never happen until we end the era of permanent politicians," said Senator DeMint. "As long as members have the chance to spend their lives in Washington, their interests will always skew toward spending taxpayer dollars to buyoff special interests, covering over corruption in the bureaucracy, fundraising, relationship building among lobbyists, and trading favors for pork – in short, amassing their own power. I have come to realize that if we want to change the policies coming out of Congress, we must change the process itself. Over the last 20 years, Washington politicians have been reelected about 90% of the time because the system is heavily tilted in favor of incumbents. If we really want to put an end to business as usual, we’ve got to have new leaders coming to Washington instead of rearranging the deck chairs as the ship goes down.”

Senator Coburn added, “The best way to ensure we are truly a government of the people, for the people, and by the people, is to replace the career politicians in Washington with citizen legislators who care more about the next generation than their next election. The power of incumbency has created an almost insurmountable advantage for Washington politicians. Incumbency allows politicians to raise millions of dollars in campaign funds in exchange for earmarks. Incumbency gives Congress the power to raise money for itself – Congress just approved itself an increase of nearly $250 million from the U.S. Treasury that members will spend to promote themselves. Finally, with redistricting incumbents can choose their voters rather than voters choosing their representatives. Term limits is the best way to break this cycle.”

More at Link: http://demint.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressReleases.Detail&PressRelease_id=df3453ee-c1f0-e8d5-3fb3-77379823cf1c

[ninetoes]

Now THAT'S change I can believe in.

[Lifeguard]

An entirely Republican sponsored amendment to the United States Constitution, severely limiting the rights of 535 American Congress people to their Constitutionally guaranteed rights of free speech, press, association, and limiting all other Americans to their freedom of choice at the ballot box.

Any such amendment to the Constitution would not pass muster in the US Supreme Court. Did any of these sponsors actually pass a course in Constitutional law in law school?

The term limits on any elected officials in Congress are available now, from the ballot box. I guess some people don't understand what America is all about and are Hell-bent on curtailing the rights of Americans to elect, by secret sacred ballot, the people they want to represent them.

This is just sour grapes from Republican politicians who do NOT understand the US Constitution, and want more chances to get rid of Democrats in Congress. IMO But their lack of understanding of the USA and her Constitution only proves their lack of a proper legal education.

[Susan43]

We have term limits...they're called elections. I don't want anyone telling me that my good Senator can't run when I like and respect her. If you are sick of your incumbants then go to work and get rid of them the American way...by voting them out. But I don't want my freedom limited by someone in another state.

Sheesh!!! And some people are compaining about Obama limiting freedoms with totally no proof and here we have proof that the right is willing to limit my voting freedom.

[ninetoes]

Yea, it is but I doubt if it will happen. These people will sink to any level to get re-elected. I can't imagine they would do anything to put themselves at a disadvantage or to take the job away. It is much like them voting themselves raises.

I dont think it will happen, but I do think it's a good idea. Most other political offices have term limits...for a very good reason. Doesnt matter how well a President does..he has a 2 term limit. Governors have term limits, no matter how well they serve their states.

[daniel green]

Bless his heart, DeMint has been there since 1998, right? :scared:

[Lifeguard]

Bless his heart, DeMint has been there since 1998, right? :scared:

SO he's really saying he will never run again? 12 years, his time is up in 2010......

[beattherap]

An entirely Republican sponsored amendment to the United States Constitution, severely limiting the rights of 535 American Congress people to their Constitutionally guaranteed rights of free speech, press, association, and limiting all other Americans to their freedom of choice at the ballot box.

Any such amendment to the Constitution would not pass muster in the US Supreme Court. Did any of these sponsors actually pass a course in Constitutional law in law school?

The term limits on any elected officials in Congress are available now, from the ballot box. I guess some people don't understand what America is all about and are Hell-bent on curtailing the rights of Americans to elect, by secret sacred ballot, the people they want to represent them.

This is just sour grapes from Republican politicians who do NOT understand the US Constitution, and want more chances to get rid of Democrats in Congress. IMO But their lack of understanding of the USA and her Constitution only proves their lack of a proper legal education.
how does term limits for congress differ constitutionally from term limits on the president.

[LisaM22]

how does term limits for congress differ constitutionally from term limits on the president.

president is a one person job

[Lifeguard]

That needs to be on the next national election ballet.
We could vote on it.

IMO, 'main street' is getting restless.

That's a good thing. :patriot:

You might want to study the process of passing Constitutional Amendments, what you suggest would require another Constitutional Amendment prior to following your idea.

[Susan43]

In order to change the change the constitution to impose term limits they would need a 2/3 vote in the House and Senate. Pretty close to impossible I'd say.

Plus if the GOP was really serious about term limits, after they ran and won on the Contract with America, they would have resigned like they vowed they would. IMO they aren't serious, just more BS to fool people.

[Lifeguard]

how does term limits for congress differ constitutionally from term limits on the president.

I guess you are asking a question, without putting a question mark at the end of your sentence.

The term limits on the President were part of a Constitutional Amendment that passed in Congress, and the required number of states. A retired President is not limited from seeking other office, nor is his speech, or press, nor whom he chooses to associate with. The office of the Presidency is one of the three branches of government, one which was permanently limited by an amendment in the Constitution. Do you honestly think members of Congress or the Supreme Court would allow for further limitations upon their branch of government? Only the President of the USA allowed his and other's in that branch to have limited power by length of office. Which President was that, by the way, do you know? Republican or Democrat? Which one?

Truman, enacted 1951, proposed 1947.

[Susan43]

True.

However crappy service would at least be out the door soon and maybe we'd get some (real) good people to seek the office.
Keep them honest. KWIM?

MOO

Why should anyone have the right to tell me who to vote for? I like and admire my critters and will continue to work for them as long as they do the the work I approve of. I have good people in office. I think they are honest.

And one other thing. I can go to their voting record and check out how they are on the issues I consider important. With a new comer you are buying a pig in a poke as far as I'm concerned. They can say anything they want and then do as they please once they are in office.

[ninetoes]

True.

However crappy service would at least be out the door soon and maybe we'd get some (real) good people to seek the office.
Keep them honest. KWIM?

MOO

I agree. The amount of money they get to give out facors to big corporate lobby types etc far overrides their supposed job of representing the people who elect them into office. Term limits wold help avoid at least some af that problem, IMO.

To say nothing of needing new laws on thier pensions etc. Wouldnt we all like to be able to work for a place for only 4 years, then be entitled to retirement benefits if we got fired? Or wouldnt it be great to go on vacation, and the first thing you do when you get back to work is give yourself a raise?

[Susan43]

I agree. The amount of money they get to give out facors to big corporate lobby types etc far overrides their supposed job of representing the people who elect them into office. Term limits wold help avoid at least some af that problem, IMO.

To say nothing of needing new laws on thier pensions etc. Wouldnt we all like to be able to work for a place for only 4 years, then be entitled to retirement benefits if we got fired? Or wouldnt it be great to go on vacation, and the first thing you do when you get back to work is give yourself a raise?

I disagree. It takes millions to run for office and where are these fresh-faced new people going to get that kind of money? It seems to me that either they will be rich and/or get it from corporate lobbies. It's very difficult for the average politician to get the public to contribute until they really have something to point to. President Obama was an abberation as far as raising money goes. Very, very unusual and the average person would not be able to raise the kind of money needed to win a race. Bloomberg spent $100M of his own money. Do we want a country of Bloombergs running the country?

The real thing we need to do is seriously work on campaign finance reform.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_pension

[daniel green]

SO he's really saying he will never run again? 12 years, his time is up in 2010......

I sure do hope so.

[daniel green]

Would be nice if the Republicans would try to pass these things while they are in power.

snipped.

Oh, just look back at the Contract With America and Gingrich and them promising term limits. I am guessing they didn't keep that contract? :confused:

[daniel green]

snipped
Plus if the GOP was really serious about term limits, after they ran and won on the Contract with America, they would have resigned like they vowed they would. .

Oops, sorry, Susan! I was replying as I was reading and had not read this when I posted about that breached Contract With America.

[pammi2]

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d104:1:./temp/~bdFSqD::|/bss/d104query.html|

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d104:2:./temp/~bdFSqD::|/bss/d104query.html|

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d104:3:./temp/~bdFSqD::|/bss/d104query.html|

[snookums1]

And as soon as the Republicans again gain control, they can pass another amendment allowing them to stay in office. How convenient.

[Hey Paula]

I would imagine this is a ploy that people do when they know it doesn't have a chance of passing. They think it makes them look noble and they know it won't really affect the status quo.

I think you're right, but I truly wish term limits would apply to all members of Congress. Familiarity breeds contempt and corruption.

IMO

[pammi2]

Senator Coburn is probably sincere. He ran on term limits and fiscal responsibility. When he ran for the house he promised to not serve more than three terms and he didn't seek a fourth. In the Senate he has said no more than two.